 How could we translate research about effective feedback to the practice of the classroom? Well, one way might be through the feedback matrix. The feedback matrix presented in this video that I developed evolved from the feedback model by John Hattie and Helen Timpoli. Each feedback type mentioned in the matrix has three feedback questions which are positioned from the learner's point of view. Firstly, where am I going, feeding up? Secondly, how am I going, feeding back? And thirdly, what is my next step, feeding forward? The notion here is that for feedback to be effective, each of these questions must be answered for or by the learner. Research suggests that much of feedback that is given is rarely used by students. For this reason, we need to focus upon how feedback is being received rather than given. What is the purpose of the three feedback questions? Let's have a closer look. The key principles of feeding up are to make the learning intent and success criteria explicit to students, to create a meta-language that will be used for feedback throughout the teaching and learning episode and to lay the platform for self-regulated learning. These assist learners to see where they are going on their learning journey. The key principles of feeding back are to inform students of their current learning state in relation to the learning intent and the success criteria, to make clear to students if they are or are not on track to succeed and to inform students of their learning progress towards the learning intent and their learning goals. These principles assist learners to see how they are going on their learning journey. The key principles of feeding forward are to close the gap between where students are and where they need to be, to clarify for students what they need to do next to succeed and to give an opportunity to improve in time for learning. These principles assist learners with the next steps of their learning journey. This feedback model is underpinned by notions of visible learning. Visible learning involves the clarification of the learning intent, learning goals and criteria for success with students so they can become active participants in the learning process. The feedback model uses questions such as where am I going to make the learning intent and criteria for success explicit for students. This helps to lay the platform for students to use self-regulatory learning habits. Visible learning also occurs when teachers perceive student work samples and responses as feedback to them about not only how their students are progressing towards the learning intent, but also as feedback to themselves about the effectiveness of their own teaching. Feedback can be most powerful when it moves in the direction from the student to the teacher as this provides evidence for the teacher to consider their impact upon learning and provides impetus to adjust instruction accordingly. Importantly, this must happen before the conclusion of the learning period if improvement is to occur as feedback received after learning is too late and rarely transferred to new learning contexts. This suggests that in order for learners to receive feedback information, particularly on how they're going and their next step, feedback needs to be situated in a context of formative assessment. The purpose of formative assessment is to provide evidence for teachers about student achievement in order to make decisions about the next steps of instruction. Hence, the effectiveness of teachers' use of the feedback may be dependent upon the assessment practices used within the learning context. Through the addition of feedback levels, Hattie and Timpoli's feedback model facilitates the targeting of differentiated specific feedback to individual learners dependent upon their learning needs. Task-level feedback is focused upon the learning intent and the specific requirements of the task. This feedback level is best suited to novice learners. Process-level feedback is aimed at the processes, skills, strategies and thinking required by the learner to complete the task. Process-level feedback is best aimed at proficient learners and works towards developing deeper understanding and learning processes. Self-regulatory-level feedback requires the student to use deep learning principles such as relational thinking and self-monitoring to compare and adjust their work in relation to the required standards, criteria or learning intent. Self-regulatory feedback is usually aimed at more advanced learners in deep learning situations, as they are knowledgeable of the task requirements and are more capable of monitoring their own performance. Feedback to the self-level, most commonly associated with praise, is best avoided as evidence suggests that it has a detrimental impact upon learning. The aim of the feedback matrix I developed is to not only provide a conceptual model of effective feedback for teachers, but importantly to translate the feedback model into practice. It must be noted that the feedback matrix is a way of encapsulating a model of feedback for learning that teachers could engage with through professional development rather than a how-to guide for effective feedback. Key points of difference between the proposed feedback matrix and Hattian-Timpleys model include, firstly, the matrix design structure. The nature of a matrix relies on the relationships between the X and Y axes. The proposed feedback matrix intersects feedback types with feedback levels. This results in the matching of the purposeful feedback type with the differentiated feedback level. Reading across the matrix, the three columns highlight to teachers the importance for each student to have clarity about the learning intent, their individual progress, and what they have to do next to improve. Reading down the matrix, the three rows illustrate to teachers that learners require different feedback dependent upon their proficiency with a task. Novice learners require specific task-based feedback, surface learning, whilst more proficient learners benefit from more relational process or self-regulatory feedback, deeper learning. The arrow alongside the three feedback levels visualizes the potential of feedback to prompt thinking from surface to deep levels. Secondly, the feedback matrix proposes to translate theory into practice with the provision of practical example prompts and strategies for teachers at the intersection of each feedback type and level. Feedback prompts are designed upon evidence-based practices from research and those observed in the classroom. Key evidence-based prompts in the matrix include feedback pertaining to the clarification of the learning intent, the use of models, the sharing of success criteria, questioning, and formative assessment, the use of strategies and goals, peer and self-assessment. Thirdly, it is necessary to emphasize the ongoing interaction between the three feedback types rather than seeing them literally as boxes just to be ticked off in a linear fashion. Likewise, the progression of feedback level is non-linear and relies on teacher's use of formative assessment practices to check their students' level of learning. In conclusion, the feedback matrix evolved from a researched-based model of feedback. It serves as a guide for teachers to help facilitate the use of effective feedback practices for their students.